Will Firefox stand in the way of the cloud?

Share This article

With more and more of our everyday activities moving to the cloud, you would think that Mozilla — like Google — would be over the moon. The browser is the portal through which the entire web is experienced, after all. In actuality, cloud-based computing represents a serious conflict with Mozilla’s primary purpose. In the words of Mitchell Baker, Chairperson and Chief Lizard Wrangler, Mozilla’s mission is to “build user sovereignty into the fabric of the Internet.” User sovereignty means that you are in full control of the surfing experience — it means that you are in the hot seat with regard to how much information you share and with who. User sovereignty literally means that the consumer is king and should never beholden to any other user or corporation on the web.

You can see how this doesn’t really jibe with the centralized, all-your-data-are-belong-to-us aspect of modern web usage. In Mozilla’s worldview, the only person or entity that should know your surfing history is you. In reality, you are monitored by tracking cookies almost everywhere on the web, and then your surfing habits are sold to the highest bidder. In Mozilla’s worldview, sensitive and important data would only ever reside on your computer. In reality, we store personal documents with companies like Dropbox. Not only can online backup service simply disappear overnight, but most of these companies are based in the US and can thus be forced to cooperate with the FBI, or other law enforcement agencies.

Ultimately, Mozilla wants surfers to use Firefox instead of cloud services. At the moment the only feature that makes this intention clear is Firefox Sync, which instantly obviates third-party, web-based services like Xmarks. Over the past year, though, Mozilla has been working on a slew of features that will reduce the amount of data that you (often unwittingly) pump into the cloud. Contacts will bring your address book into Firefox. So that you don’t have to use web-based home pages like iGoogle, Mozilla is bringing that functionality into Firefox with customized home and new tab pages, so your surfing habits never have to leave the browser. Instead of godawful sharing widgets that plague every site on the web, Mozilla will make sharing an integral part of the browser’s UI with Firefox Share – not only is it easier, but it prevents numerous intermediaries from tracking and selling your data.

Going even further, Mozilla is now working on WebAPI — a programming interface that effectively allows Firefox to communicate directly with the hardware attached to your computer. Much like Mozilla’s in-browser offerings will lessen your reliance on commercial megacorps, WebAPI hopes to do the same on the hardware side. The end result of WebAPI is Boot 2 Gecko (B2G), an Android-based OS that boots a computer straight into Firefox — much in the same way as Google’s Chrome OS, but again retaining user sovereignty.

Divergence is dangerous

There are obstacles to overcome, however. Mozilla’s approach is almost completely disparate from Microsoft and Google. It’s an odd one: all three browsers (and their mobile offspring) have spent the last two years beating each other over the head with HTML5 support, JavaScript performance, and hardware acceleration — and for the most part, Firefox, Internet Explorer, and Chrome are all so similar that they’re only separated by a handful of add-ons, personal preference, and user loyalty.

Over the next year, though, the browsers will diverge and differentiate. Mozilla will drift towards a richer, more integrated, user-first approach. Google has no option but to embrace web-based, cloud-oriented, Big Data services and eschew in-browser functionality. Somewhere in the middle is Microsoft, which can’t afford to ignore the web but has a multi-billion-dollar Windows franchise to protect. In short, all three browsers are on their way to providing very different experiences of the web.

Seven years ago when you chose Firefox 1.0 over Internet Explorer, you were making a statement and embracing the open source movement. Next year, if you choose Firefox, you might experience the web in a very different way from IE- and Chrome-toting compatriots. Whether that’s a good thing or not remains to be seen.

Tagged In

Post a Comment

http://profiles.google.com/slucre Segue Lucre

Micro$oft and Google get down on their knees every night and thank the gods of cyberspace for all the junkies who buy into their business plans and sign away their privacy and rights and money to keep all those 1%’er billionaires in more and more money and power. Long live Mozilla!

http://pornoxo.com Steven

How will sending me ads for stuff I want help them make money?

Peter Olsson

Well if you don’t understand how they make money on ads, how do you think Google makes any money at all?

http://pornoxo.com Steven

I have no idea why I typed my original comment. I think it was supposed to say ‘how does it effect MS and Google if the ads I receive are for stuff I want.’

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa Asa Dotzler

“In Mozilla’s worldview, the only person or entity that should know your surfing history is you.”

Unless you decide to trade that history for services. But you should be aware that’s what you’re doing and not have it done to you without your consent. You should also be able to opt out of making that trade.

“In Mozilla’s worldview, sensitive and important data would only ever reside on your computer.”

Unless you decide to trade that data for some service — as above. Alternatively, if you do put it in the cloud, you should be able to put it there in a way that only you can see it. Firefox Sync is a cloud service, but your data is encrypted in a way that only you can see it, and even Mozilla — which hosts the service, cannot see it.

“Over the past year, though, Mozilla has been
working on a slew of features that will reduce the amount of data that
you (often unwittingly) pump into the cloud.”

I think the “unwittingly” part here is important. The cloud is happening. It’s very useful to have access to data from anywhere on any device and Mozilla is working hard to make that all work better with users in control of how that works.

We are not working against the cloud, we are working to improve it and to make sure people understand the trade-offs they’re making.

– Asa

http://www.mrseb.co.uk Sebastian Anthony

Thanks for the clarifications :)

Yes, picking the title was tricky. It’s more that Firefox will change the shape of cloud services, or that Firefox is the biggest enemy of commercial cloud/web service providers, rather than ubiquitous cloud services themselves.

I get that “Mozilla is working hard to make that all work better with users in control of how that works” but at the moment this mostly revolves around using Mozilla-made software.

I just worry that the “first age” of Mozilla was excellent at bringing MS into line and adopting standards, but that the second age might not be quite the same. I don’t know if Google will follow Mozilla’s noble lead on some of these things.

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa Asa Dotzler

Yeah. It’s a challenge. I think we’re up to it :D

Abhinav Kishore

Now
here’s a sample of how badly a tech analyst can misinterpret things.
Just because Firefox puts the user in control of his/her privacy is, in
the author’s opinion, reason enough to declare it the cloud’s enemy. The
cloud serves to relocate data (and maybe some processing) to a central
repository on the web and make it accessible via a browser, but in no
sense does it imply a compromise of the user’s confidentiality and
privacy without his/her concern.

Jeff Jones

So Mozilla is planning for everyone to leave all of their computers on all the time (or at least simultaneously a few times a day) for sync to happen between them? That was one of the benefits to “commercial” cloud computing is that you don’t have to run your own server (even if that server is just your desktop computer).

http://profiles.google.com/bzbarsky Boris Zbarsky

Firefox sync goes through Mozilla’s servers. The key point there is that Mozilla’s server never has access to your data, because it’s encrypted before leaving your computer, with a key Mozilla does not have.

As Asa said, the idea is that you can use cloud services insofar as they benefit _you_ and without giving up control of all your data. Thats’ very different from not using them at all. But it does mean that the services need to be designed with user control as a goal.

Anonymous

So Sync is Mozilla’s Cloud. Well I already use Drop box and no, they can’t read my data any more then Mozilla can because the data is encrypted on my system with a key known only to me. Personally, I don’t trust Mozilla or anyone else wtih my personal data unless it’s encrypted using a vetted app such as GPG or Truecrypt and yes there have been problems with TC in the past but that’s the advantage of source code being available. It at least gets reviewed and vetted by those who know what their talking about. The same with GPG and that’s the type of software I use for critical data backups.

Personally, I have to wonder how long before Mozilla has to start charging a small fee for using Sync and all I can say is why pay for duplication of features/capabilities that already exist in dropbox and other only backup/sync services? The other thing I like about dropbox is that I don’t have to start my browser to load my files as they already reside on my system though I will agree that it’s possible that dropbox could be hacked/borked or the servers taken down. In that case, I’m protected because my files are encrypted and I can easily replace the service with any of the many others out there.

http://www.mrseb.co.uk Sebastian Anthony

Well, the advantage of Sync is that it uses an encryption key that only you know (it never leaves your computer). You can also host Sync data on your own server, I think — or at least, the API is open and you have the choice of picking another ‘Sync provider’ when you set it up in Firefox.

http://decafbad.com/ Les Orchard

Yes, you can definitely host your own Firefox Sync server, and I’ve done so. I’ve also written my own clone of the Firefox Sync server that runs on Google App Engine. It’s really a pretty simple API.

That’s one of the main differences from other companies – Mozilla runs Sync servers because it has to in order to support the feature, not because it wants to so it can have data to sell.

But, if Mozilla ever does something you don’t like, you can take your (encrypted) data away and stick it on your own (or someone else’s) server.

Mark S

As Sebastian pointed out, Firefox stores the key on your computer.
As far as I understand, Mozilla’s decisions in designing Firefox Sync (with a high level of client-side encryption) has made it one of the most secure “cloud services” available.
It has also been made with an open API and open/free server. So someone else could implement their own client/browser plugin as well as host their own server – reimplementing the entire stack.
If Mozilla decided to charge (something that does not jive with their methods/approach historically) someone else could easily set up their own free server as an alternative – using the built in sync code already in Firefox – still retaining all the security benefits of the original.

As I mentioned before, others, such as Chrome IE should be able to implement Firefox Sync, though passwords, understandably, will likely not be syncable.

If Mozilla was looking to set themselves up to make cash with Firefox Sync, opening the API and server was a pretty dumb strategy.

http://twitter.com/escapewindow aki

“Well I already use Drop box and no, they can’t read my data any more
then Mozilla can because the data is encrypted on my system with a key
known only to me.”

I already use Dropbox and don’t have to worry about them having my data because it’s encrypted with a key known to me.

As to Mozilla adding their Cloud Service, how long is it going to be before they have to charge for it? I for one am not willing to spend any more money on a service that duplicates functionality that I already have from a competitor. One of the biggest things I like about dropbox is that the service does not depend on a web browser. Sure if they’re service gets hacked, it could hurt lots of us but that can happen simply by being online as websites get hacked all the time, particularlly the obnoxious adverts such as punch the monkey – win an iPod or other garbage. This happens every day of the week and most people get by just fine, so if I have to do a clean install of Windows and reload all of my software, so what?

Another point is how long before Mozilla has to begin charging for this cloud storage? Once that happens people are really going to rethink even using more then a free service or they’ll begin demanding the same kind of service levels as Mozy and Dropbox offer if yo pay for them.Otherwise, they’ll have to limit things so badly due to both bandwidth and storage costs that the service isn’t going to be useable in more the 5 years I suspect where as Dropbox and some of the others already have paying customers such as myself (worth the $10 a month/$100 a year)

I think you’re really worried about paying Mozilla for Sync, since you asked about it twice. Honestly I don’t think that’ll happen any time soon, or if it does it’ll be for enhanced services. Seriously, the sync service is built to be dumb and cheap, with most of the smarts in the browser running on your hardware.

But, if Mozilla does charge and you don’t like it, you can use someone else’s Sync server or host your own. This isn’t a locked-in cloud service like we’ve all been getting used to. Can you just point your Dropbox clients at another sync hub?

Anonymous

I dont know about the name Fast_Turtle very very slow turtle sounds more like the truth you have been told just cus you willingly waste money on Dropbox does not mean Mozilla will charge and IF they did it would be a far better service than dropout drop box

Anonymous

Wow, Firefox is a friend of privacy, not an enemy of the cloud.

http://decafbad.com/ Les Orchard

“In Mozilla’s worldview, sensitive and important data would only ever reside on your computer.”

Really, I think this is better stated as: In Mozilla’s worldview, sensitive and important data would only ever reside on computers you choose to trust.There’s no antagonism toward the cloud, here, just trying to empower the user with awareness and control.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_3PU5FMA4EO75E4J7SO5J4CC5YY max

I really don’t understand why anyone would store anything with cloud services. I just don’t trust any of these services because privacy issues. Even encryption could be broken in the future.

But I have my own cloud storage called an external hard drive and a few 4 and 8 GB USB sticks.

Lewis Vail

External hard drives and USB sticks aren’t really cloud services. To be in the cloud you need to be able to access these files from anywhere without having to tote around extra hard drives.

Scott Swain

I’m choosing to see what Google is doing as a virtuous circle making it easier for all of us to share more, discover (data acquisition) more, and ultimately create more because it is easier to “stand on the shoulders of others.” When we are using tools to create and improve tools, sharing of information is a key piece of the puzzle. The idea of what “privacy” means is changing. I think it is important to stop and ask ourselves, how is this really harming me? “They are making money off of knowing my habits,” does not equate to something being taken from you in the traditional sense. Our old ideas about what “take” means must change because they are based on physical objects where you could not copy and paste.

But as pointed out by others, the main thing is that you should have complete control over the data you give up and the FLOW of it from third party to third party. That’s Firefox’s domain.

Scott Swain

Thanks, Sebastian. Yes, I do believe it is important (now) to choose what we share. This article inspired me to spend the last couple hours making this: http://clearsay.net/privacy_is_becoming_obsolete.asp

http://www.mrseb.co.uk Sebastian Anthony

Cool! Will read it tomorrow :)

Jeff Hammel

Thanks for the article! I think it well summarizes the current situation. Its not that the Cloud, in concept, is evil, it is that instead of one federated cloud with a protocol — how the internet works — there are different siloed clouds that each contender wants you to buy into. I want to have federated data but don’t want to lock myself into a particular solution. Firefox lets me choose how I want to use the web.

http://www.facebook.com/brunnegd Gary Brunner

Sounds like a good reason to stay with FF, now if they will just stop with the silly number upgrade wars.

Lewis Vail

I don’t think it’s as much a number upgrade war as much as they just changed the way they assign version numbers. It doesn’t really seem to be changing very much from one version to the next ever since the big change of version 4

Anonymous

I have always been concerned about personal information being tracked and publications such as ebooks, scanned books, newspapers, movies and any other media being altered to suit the interests of government and corporate bureaucracies. Storing things in the cloud will easily allow this to happen. Blogs and web browsers already de-link controversial articles at the request of corporations and governments.

Anonymous

I do not trust the cloud. Specially for private or confidential stuff. Anytime you put stuff on a third party server, you have pretty much lost control over it. They can index it, back it up, who knows what else. If I need to share privately and securely with someone I do it with Binfer or just mail a CD.

Anonymous

This all sounds good, but the teething problems F.F. is experiencing, leaves one to wonder? I might also ask about our “Big Brother” and the roll it play[s] in all of this? Expectations with the nagging feeling of nothing is safe as lone as we connect to the internet, does not exactly exude confidence anything is safe from prying eyes, particularly personal information, encryption or . . . . . . . ?

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AJBCSY4LUIVO3QAZO5VROYC27U ATH44

The text in this article is center aligned and impossible to read…

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AJBCSY4LUIVO3QAZO5VROYC27U ATH44

The text in this article is center aligned and impossible to read…

Anonymous

My version for Firefox [7.0.1] and its attendant addons have stripped a lot of crap from this article. Which is good.

I notice that there are 15 trackers that are blocked as well as a host of other sites. That is the way I like
Firefox and why I continue to use Firefox. If I am unable to see the content or something as simple as comments, it is off to the next website. There are plenty out there.

And I have to log into some “service” to be able to comment.

I did have to open the article in Internet Explorer to comment and see the dates of the existing comments.

http://st1jere.blogspot.com Sam Wanjere

I like that bit where Mozilla aims to let you control your own data. I believe that itself is a unique selling point that distinguishes them from Microsoft and Google. Mozilla, like Apple, has it’s core diehards who can help support and market it around. I’d like to see the details of how the Mozilla Foundation wants to market their cloud-based alternative but the potential is definitely there.

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Copyright 1996-2015 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved. ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.